At 09:53 PM 11/8/99 , hal@finney.org wrote:
>Also, your Vat to Vat protocol does not try to camouflage traffic
>patterns; although the data is encrypted, an eavesdropper can determine
>when communications occur, and how much data is sent.
From talking to Ian Goldberg, I believe Pluribus would be perfectly happy to
live on top of the Freedom network. Pluribus does nothing for
untraceability. Freedom (from our point of view) does nothing but
untraceability. These seem like orthogonal composable parts of the puzzle.
Our standard high security scenario for analyzing possible risk should
therefore probably be Pluribus on Freedom (assuming ZKS open sources it),
and users who consider the untraceability of value. I don't want to blow
this kind of value elsewhere in the architecture.
Btw, an I using the right terminology? I would say that E/Pluribus provides
pseudonymity & bearer rights, Freedom provides untraceability, and Blinding
provides unlinkability. Robust privacy benefits from having all three
together.
Cheers,
--MarkM